The War on Terror - A Study of the Use of Military Force against the Contemporary Terror Threat

Abstract: The ''war on terror'' is very much a topic of the day. The main threat against the western society is said to no longer be armies controlled by belligerent states but non state actors, which by means of new technology have the potential of launching large scale attacks equivalent to attacks carried out by states. This thesis examines the means available in the military fight against terrorism and their respective suitability for the task. The traditional regulation of the use of force as stated by the UN Charter severely restricts a state's right to use force on the territory of another absent an armed attack attributable to the latter. In this regard ''the war on terror'' challenges the traditional state centred international order. A major challenge to international law is how to respond to new situations, the success of which might depend on the degree of innovativeness employed by the subjects of international law. Here the US answer to international terrorism, the so called Bush Doctrine represents a very innovative line of reasoning. In this thesis an attempt is made to highlight the interconnections between different parts of the international order for the purpose of illuminating the importance of seeing the larger picture when it comes to understanding relevant legal provision, but also when deciding how to best respond to new challenges. Conclusions drawn are - even if terrorism ultimately is a political and social phenomenon military means can be a useful and necessary tool in the fight against it. It is however important to keep in mind that while the international system provides for military force to be used against non-state actors, it does not do so unrestrictedly. Further, armed measures are not in themselves sufficient and to be truly effective the fight against terrorism must also address its root causes - as it in the long run seems to be an impossible mission, and an unsuitable solution, to eliminate all potential terrorists with military force. Further, the exercise of armed force abides by the principle of proportionality and necessity and must be weighed against other principles and values of the international order as to make sure that the use of force ''fits into'' the larger legal picture. One of the most crucial issues is which of collective action and unilateral action that are best suited to address the terror threat. In the opinion of the author the collective security system is superior as it represents a more democratic model and provides for a parcel of measures to be undertaken which potentially can answer to the different aspects of terrorism. This thesis does not offer a final conclusive solution as to how one best deals with international terrorism, but hopefully I have managed to shred some light on the body of international law which governs the war on terror and to describe some of the problems involved, and also indicated which solution that ought to be the most beneficial for the international community, or perhaps the least prejudicial for the same.